Tharani v. State Rep.By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

Dated : 21.01.2021 CORAM :

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. BHARATHIDASAN Crl.O.P.No.86 of 2021 Tharani, ... Petitioner Vs.

The State rep. by Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch Police Station, Tiruppur District.

(Crime No.7 of 2017) ... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of her arrest in Crime No.7 of 2017 pending on the file of the respondent.

For Petitioner : Mr.D.R.Arunkumar For Respondent : Mr.S.Karthikeyan Addl. Public Prosecutor

O R D E R

(The case has been heard through video conference) The petitioner apprehends arrest at the hands of respondent police for the offence punishable under Sections 153, 505 (1)(b) and 505(1)(c) of I.P.C. in Crime No.7 of 2017 and now, she has filed the above petition seeking for anticipatory bail.

2. The petitioner is working as a Lecturer in the Government College. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner said to have made some derogatory remarks against the learned Judge of this court. Hence, based on the complaint given by an Advocate, the criminal case has been registered against her and now, she is seeking anticipatory bail.

3. The learned counsel appearing for petitioner would submit that the petitioner has not sent any message and she has only forwarded the message. He would submit that she is an innocent person and she has been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he prays to grant https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that after verification, it is found that the derogatory message is only created by the petitioner and she has only uploaded the same in the social media. Hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. I have heard and considered the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for petitioner as well as Additional Public Prosecutor and perused the records.

6. Taking into consideration of the fact that the petitioner, being a teacher, she should be a role model to the students and she should not have made some derogatory message against the learned Judge of this Court. Therefore, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.

-sd/- 21/01/2021 This order, on being produced, be punctually observed and carried into execution by all concerned TRUE COPY Sub-Assistant Registrar (Statistics/C.S.) High Court, Madras - 600 104.

TO 1.THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE , AVANASHI.

2.THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, TIRUPPUR DIST[FOR INFORMATION] 3.THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

4.INSPECTOR OF POLICE, DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH POLICE STATION, TIRUPPUR DISTRICT.

CC to M/S.D.R.ARUNKUMAR Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.86/2021 Date :21/01/2021 ksm29/01/2021 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/